User talk:Nevit/Archive 1

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Archive 1 Archive 2 Archive 3

Aquariology categories

Hi, Nevit

I see your category changes in aquarium and aquarium fish categories. You put the categories "freswater aquarium fishes" and "marine aquarium fishes" in several categories, and in several articles like Aquarium and Trichogaster trichopterus. I I did the same at first, when I create the categories, but it was an error (according to the administrators).

When I created that categories, I include articles and categories in the main Category:Aquariology. All the categories and articles included in acuariology category are linked across the subcategories. If one image is in "Amphiprion sebae", no is necessary include the image in the "marine aquarium fishes", because the category "Amphiprion sebae" is here.

Example: I included Trichogaster trichopterus in the new Category:Trichogaster trichopterus, and that category is included in Category:Freshwater aquarium fishes. If the specific category (Trichogaster trichopterus) is included in the other category (freswater aquarium fishes), it is not necessary to include. Because is a category, no a navigation bar.

I see that you add Actinopterygii to freshwater and marine aquarium fishes categorys... No, please. Not all the Actinopterygii are aquarium fishes. Please, speak with me to coordinate the job.

Excuse for my poor english (please, take all the text in friendly language, perhaps my english is a little sudden). Greetings, --Pristigaster 11:42, 30 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I am glad that the comment was useful (and with my bad english! je je). The categorys and articles are a problem in Wikimedia. Three comments:

  • The Gallerys: You was creating gallerys in the articles or the categorys, but if you mark the photo in the correct category, the wikisoftware generates a gallery automatically, without work. Oh, I see that you undertand this: In Category:Hemigrammus erythrozonus you work in a galler y, and the wikisoftware generate the gallery (when I mark the images in the category). I see that you delete the gallery (there was two). OK!
  • The specific Categories: Example: The article Aquarium is a general article about aquariums (or it it should be). I personally would create it inside the category page Aquariology, with a small text, and making use of the subcategories and the automatic galleries, but is my opinion (because for articles is the wikipedia). mmm... You add other categories linkin to Aquariology, Freshwater aquarium fishes, Marine aquarium fishes..... etc. The article is in the specific category, but in other three inespecific connected directly to the especific category.

I look your Category:Freshwater plants, good work! (and hard, you constructed the gallery manually). Greetings, --Pristigaster 10:51, 31 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thankyou Pristigaster, I learned new things from you. Nevit 16:37, 31 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

FP Candidates

I've nominated a couple of your images for Featured Picture status.


★ This image has been promoted to Featured picture! ★

The image Image:Egg-512364.jpg, that you nominated on Commons:Featured picture candidates/Image:Egg-512364.jpg has been promoted. Thank you for your contribution. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so.


★ This image has been promoted to Featured picture! ★

The image Image:Lightning 02890-200208.jpg, that you nominated on Commons:Featured picture candidates/Image:Lightning 02890-200208.jpg has been promoted. Thank you for your contribution. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so.

--MichaelMaggs 21:34, 4 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]


good pictures with noise

Hi Nevit, I like your pictures a lot. Image:Tema Nezahat Gokyigit Park 05204-a.jpg is one of my favourite. The only thing that prevents me from nominating it as Quality images is that there are strong colour aberrations around the buildings and there is noise in the sky. It would be quite easy to remove this before the hdr conversion is done. Afterwards it's much more difficult. --Ikiwaner 17:31, 10 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Personal image galleries

Hello there. Some of your images / image galleries appear to be large personal art galleries. While the Commons welcomes free images, the stated scope of the project specifically states that "files uploaded to the Commons have to be useful for some Wikimedia project" and "[p]rivate image collections and the like are generally not wanted. Wikimedia Commons is not a web host for e.g. ... self-created artwork without educational purpose"

More specifically, I'm mostly concerned about User:Nevit/Animations, User:Nevit/Digital_workshop and User:Nevit/Gimpressionist, which do not seem to serve an educational purpose. Other websites, such as DeviantArt are better suited to personal image galleries. It would be appreciated if you could do something with any images you've uploaded that are non-educational, such as filing a deletion request for them.

Thanks, and keep up the good work. Consumed Crustacean 13:41, 22 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]



Wikinews Photo

Hey!

Can you take a quick look at User:Symode09/Wikinews, if you can help, I would really appreciate it

Symode09 16:51, 8 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This message has been sent to around 25 people

Wikinews Images

Thanks for your help, they are just the sort of thing I'm looking for!

--talk to symode09's or Spread the love! 01:05, 9 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]


Proposal concerning User PH-n templates

Hi, there is a proposal and vote concerning the {{User PH-0}},...,{{User PH-3}} templates, that you may be interested in. --Tony Wills 10:59, 18 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Geometrical toys

Hi, I just deleted the gallerypage for "Geometrical toys" as it was empty. Please feel free to recreate if there are images to fill the page :). Kind regards, Deadstar (msg) 09:43, 6 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Swimming images

Hi Nevit,

The images from the book Amuzesh-e Shena you uploaded cannot be PD in Iran. This license applies to photographs and films, and lasts for 30 years (so before 1977). The images you uploaded dates back from 1982. I'm going to ask an admin for deletion. Please be careful with the license next time. Fabienkhan 11:32, 22 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]







Quality Image Promotion
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Lamb 09807-a.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates.

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments {{{3}}}

--Ikiwaner 21:16, 29 November 2006 (UTC) [reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Lactarius salmonicolor dsc05255 nevit.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates.

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments {{{3}}}

--Ikiwaner 17:31, 30 November 2006 (UTC) [reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Kids 09185.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates.

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments {{{3}}}

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Cunda church 07832.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates.

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments {{{3}}}

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Karagoz theatre 06315.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates.

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Beautiful light. The expression on the man's face is lovely. Do you have any shots of the same performance from the other side of the screen? Arria Belli 12:50, 30 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Offroad Jeep 05760 2.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates.

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments {{{3}}}

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Bolu-08523 nevit.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates.

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments {{{3}}}

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Plastic Protractor Polarized 05375.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates.

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Very good considering the difficult subject. Arria Belli 15:24, 5 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Grape 00005.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates.

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Good composition, natural colours --Mbdortmund 00:34, 10 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Rope-03235.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates.

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Original! Lycaon 21:15, 13 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Usm-unsharp-mask.png, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates.

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments  Comment Do you have a png or svg copy? Thegreenj 21:37, 14 April 2008 (UTC) ✓ Done PNG version uploaded. --Nevit 22:29, 14 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
OK, looks good. Thegreenj 00:23, 15 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Wind-09929-fm.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates.

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Good, solid abstract yet nicely illustrative of wind.Arria Belli 12:44, 14 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Beyoglu 4419 01x.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates.

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments  Comment Looks nice, but I don't see the value for wikimedia projects (see the guidelines) --LC-de 09:16, 17 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
 InfoThese are of the few high-res photomosaics available on commoms. Which is an stitching technique. The technique itself is the subject. The main problem with rarity of photomosaics is in the copyright of the thumbnails. Which should be properly attributed. In this case all thumbnails are own work. --Nevit 09:36, 17 April 2008 (UTC) - Fascinating technique - Alvesgaspar 20:38, 17 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Beyoglu 5994 01x.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates.

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments  Comment Looks nice, but I don't see the value for wikimedia projects (see the guidelines) --LC-de 09:16, 17 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
 InfoThese are of the few high-res photomosaics available on commoms. Which is an stitching technique. The technique itself is the subject. The main problem with with rarity of photomosaics is in the copyright of the thumbnails. Which should be properly attributed. In this case all thumbnails are own work. --Nevit 09:36, 17 April 2008 (UTC) - Fascinating technique -- Alvesgaspar 20:38, 17 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Goose 07274.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates.

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Love the detail of the feet overlapping. :-) Arria Belli 11:03, 20 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Mardin P1030274 20080423101837.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates.

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments  Question Building is tilted about 0.4° CW, could you fix this? --Leafnode 23:38, 1 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I've fixed this myself. Great composition, interesting subject --Leafnode 21:43, 2 May 2008 (UTC) Thankyou for fixing the tilt. --Nevit 21:45, 2 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Chimera Fire 00279 nevit.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates.

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Uncommon but QI for Commons--B.navez 17:31, 15 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Book 06490 20040730160049 L.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates.

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Nice idea. Borderline in size though... --Dschwen 22:23, 16 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Fur_skirt.jpg

Thanks for the fine picture and for your help! [1]--Kuerschner 06:02, 10 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Darica Piranha 03037.jpg

Hi, Nevit, I comitted an error in the Piranha photo, I forget two categories... (in the cut and paste... I remove it). Thanks to correct my error. Long time that did not watch your photos, and since then you have upload many and great photos. Congratulations! Great work! Regards, --Pristigaster 09:25, 11 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]


Index of ftp://ftp.gimp.org/pub/gimp/contrib/

Is this you ftp://ftp.gimp.org/pub/gimp/contrib/gimp-nevit-*? Active on egroups gimpi, if I remember correctly....

I have been trying to sort through the bogus information and the real lately. It is a challenge. One example, they planted a letter on google groups that says that gimp .54 copied layers from photoshop. The rumor I heard way back when was that photoshop copied the layers dialog from gimp. The letter is obviously bogus and all of the rest of it are rumors to me because almost every windows box I saw back then had that free version of Paint Shop Pro installed on it; the one that announced how long it had been installed without a registration by counting the days in the opening dialog before it would start. -- carol 01:23, 22 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]


Nerden

Nerden yaziyosun bu mesajlari anlamadimki gecenin bu saatinde bana yer arattiriyosun hoca --ufukozkan 02:04, 27 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Bilgisayardan :)))) --Nevit Dilmen 21:30, 31 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Istanbul Archaeological Museum

hello there,

you have been actively participating in the Category:Istanbul Archaeological Museum. I checked the English version, and it seems though that the English Wiki name is "Istanbul Archaeology Museum" [2]. Which one is the correct one, because either the English Wiki or the Commons name should be corrected in that case so that they are in synch. Thank you. Gryffindor 09:45, 2 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Since I am getting more and more conflicting information now, I think it best we funnel the proposal on the talk page here [3]. Gryffindor 18:27, 2 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Consensus seems to be approaching, your final input is welcome. Gryffindor 20:14, 6 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Valued images evaluation

Dear Nevit,

This is a standard message to the 18 different users who so far have been involved in testing Valued images candidates as either a nominator, reviewer or project editor. We are interested in hearing what you think about the project and what your positive and negative experiences have been. We would be grateful if you would voice your opinion here. Thank you,

-- Slaunger 19:48, 19 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]


Antoin Sevruguin images

I see you have uploaded a number of copies of Sevruguin's images from the Smithsonian Institution.

  1. They have borders that I am happy to remove (if other issues can be sorted).
  2. The images have a watermark - not easily removed.
  3. SI images are copyright with "free use".[4] If you can demonstrate wiki is acceptable, SI site specifies a preferred citation method (from http://www.asia.si.edu/archives/finding_aids/sevruguin.html):

To cite images in Series 1, Myron Bement Smith Collection, please use:

Myron Bement Smith Collection. Freer Gallery of Art and Arthur M. Sackler Gallery Archives. Smithsonian Institution, Washington, D.C. Gift of Katharine Dennis Smith, 1973-1985. Photographer: Antoin Sevruguin, negative number [when appropriate.]

To cite images in Series 2, Antoin Sevruguin Photographs, please use:

Antoin Sevruguin Photographs. Freer Gallery of Art and Arthur M. Sackler Gallery Archives. Smithsonian Institution, Washington, D.C. Gift of Jay Bisno.

If you to sort detailed descriptions and permissions, I will deal with the borders. Finavon 20:46, 21 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

(discussion continued at User talk:Finavon#AS)


Question

Hi Nevit, I wonder what exactly you've pictured there. Is it an old mysterious window? ;-) Anyway, could you please add a better description to the image information page? Many thanks (not only for this, but for all your good images, btw) --Überraschungsbilder 01:28, 2 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Mardin P1030274 20080423101837.JPG

Building on the picture is tilted about 0.4° CW, could you fix this? Or, if you want, I can do this for you. --Leafnode 20:30, 2 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Rotated. Check if it's ok :) --Leafnode 21:00, 2 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Fill flashing

Hi, I've fill-flashed my image. Care to have another look? Lycaon 15:44, 4 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]


More informative description for Safranbolu-photos needed

Hi Nevit,
the description of most or all of your nice images from Safranbolu is only "Photographs from Safranbolu". Could you add instead information what is actually shown in the picture? Thanks. --Túrelio 20:39, 18 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The city of Safranbolu (itself) is a world heritage site. The buildings, streets and lifestyle is to be protected. Images show status at 2007. More info can be added by users. The only keyword needed is Safranbolu. --Nevit Dilmen 21:11, 18 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Help needed with the Valued images project

As you may have seen, this project is going live for nominations on 1 June, 2008 at 0:00 UTC. Before then, there are a few things to be finished off, and any help you can give will be welcome. The latest discussion is at Commons talk:Valued images candidates#Open action items for Valued images.

When the project launches publicly on 1 June, it will need reviewers who are able to jump in quickly and provide prompt feedback. During those critical first few weeks it will be important to have a decent number of reviewers who are prepared to put in the effort to make sure the first nominations are well-reviewed, as that will set the standard for the future.

Would you help, please, with the final tasks now, and also pledge your help with some reviewing on 1 June and thereafter? --MichaelMaggs 17:08, 19 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

FP promotion

 ★ This image has been promoted to Featured picture! ★

The image Image:Rope-03235.JPG, that you nominated on Commons:Featured picture candidates/Image:Rope-03235.JPG has been promoted. Thank you for your contribution. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so.

Alvesgaspar 23:34, 22 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Noise profiles

Hi,

I downloaded noise profiles for Nikon D70 from neatimage.com, and obtained four dozens of *.dnp files. If I take a ISO400 picture exemple, here are my different choices. Where do I have to put these *.dnp files ? I didn't find the right menu in Capture NX, and neither in Photoshop...

  • D70-PreWB-JPEG L-Sharp ML-Normal Curve - NIKON D70 (ISO400; 4bpp; SharpSoft; 3008x2000; WB Default; 1by13s).dnp
  • D70-PreWB-JPEG L-Sharp ML-P&S 4.1 Curve - NIKON D70 (ISO400; 4bpp; SharpSoft; 3008x2000; WB Default; 1by13s).dnp
  • D70-PreWB-RAW NC 4.2-Sharp ML-Normal Curve - NIKON D70 (ISO400; Uncompressed; 3008x2000; WB Default; 1by13s).dnp
  • D70-PreWB-RAW NC 4.2-Sharp ML-P&S 4.1 Curve - NIKON D70 (ISO400; Uncompressed; 3008x2000; WB Default; 1by13s).dnp

Thanks, --Romanceor [parlons-en] 12:18, 23 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Valued images test review phase has ended

Dear Nevit,

Thank you for participating in the development of the Valued images project by test nominating one or more candidates. We have used the input from the test reviews to fine-tune the guidelines, process and templates used, hereby hopefully improving the setup.

We have now decided that on June 1, 2008 at 0:00 (UTC), the valued image project will be opened for official nominations. To get ready for the grand opening, we will close down the last remaining open test candidates in a few hours, such that the candidates list pages are emptied and ready.

Since there has been a certain amount of instruction creep over the course of the test review pahse, we have decided that all promoted and declined candidates from the test review phase will be reset to the so-called "undecided" state prior to the opening. This means that test valued image candidate review pages all end up in Category:Undecided valued images candidates and the test sets end up in Category:Undecided valued image set candidates.

The votes from the original test review will be archived in a previous reviews subpage and reset upon renomination.

Although all nominations will be reset, you, as a test nominator, will still have the advantage that each candidate can be re-nominated beginning June 1 0:00 UTC. The votes from the original test review will be archived in a previous reviews subpage and reset upon renomination. Click on the links to the aforementioned categories for instruction on how to renominate.

In addition, the project has decided to re-nominate all candidates, which were test promoted, unless you tell us not to do so on my talk page. Also, do not hesitate to contact me if you have any questions or problems relating to valued images.

I hope, you will also take part in the project once it goes on the air, either as nominator, maintainer and/or reviewer.

Happy editing, -- Slaunger 22:16, 25 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

VI seal

Nevit, I hope you were not discouraged by the decline I did on your set of valued historic images. I am interested in your views on this if you feel there were certain unaddressed aspects in my review. I love your photos by the way. Many of them are very different from what we usually see, and it is refreshing. -- Slaunger 22:16, 25 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Quality Image Promotion
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Image-Haydarpasa-1070032 1070097b.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates.

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Good, solid image of the interior of the building. Arria Belli 13:56, 27 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Declined promotion of my image on quality images candidate

Hello, you rejected my image Image:Nasr ol Molk mosque inside colorful.jpg as a candidate for being promoted quality image saying it was not an image from a wikimedian. The image was first loaded by User:Arria Belli who is also an admin on the commons, from my home page at flickr, I updated it with a better version to fill the quality standards. I am dynamosquito on flickr, see my profile with links to my wikipages, Pentocelo on fr.wiki and Pentocelo on the commons, as all the links show. Therefore, the image is from a wikimedian, myself. Thx to reconsider your judgement taking into account these precisions. In the case you still cast some doubts, thx for asking confirmation to User:Arria Belli who knows me both on flickr and wiki. Kind regards Pentocelo 09:08, 3 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

QI Comment

Hi Nevit, I moved the bicolour Wallaby image into consensual review and marked your comment as an oppose. Could you check here that I have your comment as you would like it ? - Peripitus 11:39, 4 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Cappadocia

Can you please use for your pictures the local points subcategory, such as Goreme, Uçhisar, etc.? It's dump again.--Shakko 10:44, 11 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Quality Image Promotion
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Glass of tea 05119.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates.

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments The noise reduction artifacts are not my cup of tea : ) but overall, it's a solid QI. BTW, please link to the original author in your nomination. Thegreenj 14:51, 14 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

FP Promotion

 ★ This image has been promoted to Featured picture! ★

The image Image:Plastic Protractor Polarized 05375.jpg, that you nominated on Commons:Featured picture candidates/Image:Plastic Protractor Polarized 05375.jpg has been promoted. Thank you for your contribution. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so.

--Simonizer (talk) 11:23, 20 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Species, please

Hi, thanks for all your nice photos. Could you please describe the species of the animal, when you can ? For instance, what is the bird displayed in Image:London Zoo 01244.jpg ? Thanks ! Frédéric (talk) 18:56, 2 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Quality Image Promotion
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Grey seal breast feeding 1150144.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates.

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Nice image taken in a wild!--Mbz1 03:37, 6 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Watermark?

You marked Image:Eski Cami.jpg as having a "digital watermark" but it looks to me like what it has is a date/time stamp that some cameras place on either film negatives or digital photos. I'd be surprised if a version of this photo ever existed without that date/time stamp. - Jmabel ! talk 01:01, 20 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]


Infrared photography

I'm very interested in you Infrared photography. Your results are fascinating, how do you get the x-ray effect with the people in them? do you use a different type of filter for this effect? I bought myself a UV 72 some non descript brand for my Canon 400d with some very interesting effects. Keep up the good work, and thanks for sharing your images they are very inspiring.

Best wishes Paul Harrop

Most are done with Sony 717 & 828 with Hoya Black or Red IR filter. --Nevit Dilmen (talk) 19:59, 18 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Bubbles in the Dark picture

Hi, I am the owner of fringewiki.info. I am looking to make a new skin and I need a good background. When I was googling dark bubbles you picture came up. I am wondering if I can use it for my site and possibly alter it a little too? I will of course post your name in the attributions page defining that it is your picture. Please email me back or reply via talk page. Thanks and regards, --Truetech (talk) 00:39, 25 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! Hopefully it will look nice on my fringewiki.info site...Regards, --Truetech (talk) 02:09, 27 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

سلام

شما فارسی بلدید ؟ --Mardetanha talk 23:06, 10 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

ایرانی هستید ؟ --Mardetanha talk 23:29, 10 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]



Bird taking flight

Dear Nevit
I have use your bird taking flight image for a video illustrating a song of mine about a cat. The bird escaped :-)
Duly accredited. :-)
Wrong side of the door
Kind regards
David
Dwsolo (talk) 22:28, 16 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Infrared 02603-tree.jpg

Hello Nevit - can you add the location where this photo was taken, please? - Thanks, MPF (talk) 14:04, 25 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Many thanks! - MPF (talk) 20:45, 25 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

London Underground pictures

Cheers for your London Underground pictures. I've managed to categorise the majority of them to the individual stations. Could you help with the few which are left over? Just updating the description with the location would be fine. Cheers Railwayfan2005 (talk) 21:39, 7 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'll (eventually) stick them in a gallery and see if somebody else can spot the locations. Cheers all the same. Railwayfan2005 (talk) 22:01, 8 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Use of picture

Hello, I was wondering what the position would be if I wanted to use one of your pictures, specifically the one here, as the banner for a blog for a course on the history and culture of post-war Britain and Ireland that I'm teaching at a Belgian university this semester (starting tomorrow)? It's the best (free) picture I've found that combines a contemporary look with something recognisably British. I'm not sure how far the permissions extend under the GNU (it looks as though I can do pretty much whatever I like as long as I attribute the picture to you and respect its integrity - is that right?) --Paularblaster (talk) 16:20, 26 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks very much! --134.58.127.72 00:14, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

selamlar

sizin cok cok iyi katkılarıniza gore tesekur ederim.ben da bu kac gunde bir seri ayri resimler yüklemishem onlara da bakin lutfen :-) --Mardetanha talk 21:45, 17 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Quality Image Promotion
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Candles in Love 07406.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates.

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments nice shot --AngMoKio 17:39, 22 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Quality Image Promotion
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Music 01754.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates.

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments OK for me -- Alvesgaspar 08:49, 27 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Quality Image Promotion
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Windflower-05237-nevit.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates.

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Love it. Mattbuck 15:59, 7 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
 Comment Nice, but useless without the actual shutter speed values. --Eusebius 08:22, 8 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Image renaming

I saw that you tagged a image for rename but your not on the checkpage for the bot (Commons:MediaMoveBot/CheckPage) Please go to the the talk page and put your name up for approval so that the bot can automatically rename your request instead of waiting for someone else on that list to confirm for you. Betacommand 16:12, 24 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

bravo

I find your image File:Dcp7323-Edirne-Eski Camii Allah.jpg very powerful, very symbolic and deeply religious. was the woman praying? --Diligent (talk) 05:25, 5 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

image needing improvement

Would it be possible to get a correction to this Image you have uploaded. It is helpful to the Article, but sorely needs the missing parts filled in. Exit2DOS2000 (talk) 22:50, 2 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:Science Museum London 1110593 nevit-2.jpg

This image appears to be a copy of a 2D image. Is there any reason not to consider it a derivative work? dito Science Museum London 1110593 nevit.jpg and File:Science_Museum_London_1110594_nevit.jpg Geni (talk) 21:49, 1 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]


Good photo!

Hi, I just wanted to compliment you on File:Poecilia reticulata Fry DSC04357 nevit.jpg - having recently been trying to take photos of the baby guppies in my tank, and not being anywhere near as successful as you, I must say that you are obviously very talented! Lankiveil (talk) 11:02, 27 September 2009 (UTC).[reply]

Copyright Inquiry

Dear Nevit, I am e-mailing from a production company in England and we are making a documentary series for National Geographic. We would love to use the image you have uploaded, Leonardo da Vinci Parachute, within our documentary. Before we can do so, we need to double check this image is in the public domain. It would be great to discuss this further over e-mail. Please e-mail me at Ellie.davis@parthenonentertainment.com.

Many Thanks,

Ellie ( 212.44.13.2 )

The Image you requested is not in public domain. It is dual licenced as Creative Commons Share alike and GFDL. That means you can use that image in case you share the film as we have done the photograph. ( You can not copyright the film you produce or the portion contains that photograph) and you should give attribution. For details about the license review the license text under photo. --Nevit Dilmen (talk) 11:55, 23 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Quality Image Promotion
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! The Gypsy Girl Mosaic of Zeugma 1250575.png, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates.

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Very good and useful. --Cayambe 09:21, 3 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

FPC

Hi, hope the edit and comments didn't offend you. Would you consider perhaps a conomination on the reedited version? Best regards, Durova (talk) 05:05, 10 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Quality Image Promotion
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Gaziantep Zoo 1260109 cr.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates.

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Good.--Mbz1 22:46, 16 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:Istanbul-logo.svg

dansk ∙ italiano ∙ sicilianu ∙ Deutsch ∙ català ∙ magyar ∙ čeština ∙ português do Brasil ∙ Esperanto ∙ español ∙ português ∙ English ∙ hrvatski ∙ français ∙ Nederlands ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ polski ∙ galego ∙ íslenska ∙ slovenščina ∙ suomi ∙ svenska ∙ Türkçe ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ ∙ български ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ українська ∙ മലയാളം ∙ 日本語 ∙ 中文（简体）‎ ∙ 中文（繁體）‎ ∙ فارسی ∙ +/−

There seems to be a problem regarding the description and/or licensing of this particular file. It has been found that you've added in the image's description only a Template that's not a license and although it provides useful information about the image, it's not a valid license. Could you please resolve this problem, adding the license in the image linked above? You can edit the description page and change the text. Uploading a new version of the file does not change the description of the file. This page may give you more hints on which license to choose. Thank you.

This message was added automatically by Nikbot, if you need some help about it, ask its master (Filnik) or go to the Commons:Help desk. --Filnik 01:18, 28 December 2009 (UTC)

New edit

Background removed as requested.

Hi, had another go at this with a bit of help from Xavexgoem. Think it's ready for another run at FPC? Best regards, Durova (talk) 07:02, 28 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Would you like to conominate at FPC? Thanks very much for an excellent high resolution file to work from. :) Durova (talk) 19:51, 28 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Tip: Categorizing images

Afrikaans ∙ العربية ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ বাংলা ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form) ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ English ∙ Esperanto ∙ español ∙ فارسی ∙ suomi ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ עברית ∙ magyar ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ 日本語 ∙ ქართული ∙ 한국어 ∙ македонски ∙ മലയാളം ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk ∙ polski ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ русский ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ српски / srpski ∙ svenska ∙ Türkçe ∙ українська ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ 中文（简体）‎ ∙ 中文（繁體）‎ ∙ +/−

Hello, Nevit!
Tip: Add categories to your files
Tip: Add categories to your files

Thanks a lot for contributing to the Wikimedia Commons! Here's a tip to make your uploads more useful: Why not add some categories to describe them? This will help more people to find and use them.

Here's how:

1) If you're using the UploadWizard, you can add categories to each file when you describe it. Just click "more options" for the file and add the categories which make sense:

2) You can also pick the file from your list of uploads, edit the file description page, and manually add the category code at the end of the page.

[[Category:Category name]]

For example, if you are uploading a diagram showing the orbits of comets, you add the following code:

[[Category:Astronomical diagrams]]
[[Category:Comets]]

This will make the diagram show up in the categories "Astronomical diagrams" and "Comets".

When picking categories, try to choose a specific category ("Astronomical diagrams") over a generic one ("Illustrations").

Thanks again for your uploads! More information about categorization can be found in Commons:Categories, and don't hesitate to leave a note on the help desk.

CategorizationBot (talk) 10:51, 29 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Commonist licenses

Dear Nevit,

As you might know Wikimedia is currently migrating from the GFDL to cc-by-sa-3.0. Wikimedia Commons is also migrating and we're down to a few thousand files (started with about 1,8M files). Unfortunatly this number keeps growing because Commonist contains outdated license templates. You appear to be running Commonist, could you please change the following lines in your license.txt? You can also copy a new licenses.txt from here.

{{self2|GFDL|cc-by-sa-2.5,2.0,1.0}} should be changed to {{self|GFDL|Cc-by-sa-3.0,2.5,2.0,1.0}}
{{self2|GFDL|cc-by-2.5}} should be changed to {{self|GFDL|cc-by-3.0}}
{{self|cc-by-sa-2.5}} should be changed to {{self|cc-by-sa-3.0}}

Can I also fix the images you have already uploaded by adding {{Cc-by-sa-3.0}}?

Thank you very much, --MGA73 (talk) 19:18, 3 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Trimming

Hey Nevit, really? I've never recognized any quality losses. But thank you for that information. --Thomas doerfer (talk) 15:11, 3 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

hedgehog

Hi Nevit,

I'm talking about this picture (btw, very nice!). in 2002 the both hedgehog species E. concolor and formerly E. concolor roumanicus, now E. roumanicus were recognized as different. so if this picture if made in Europe it is most likely not a Southern White-breasted Hedgehog but a Northern White-breasted Hedgehog (see the range map for both species). do you remember where you took the photo? thanks, Rbrausse (talk) 11:23, 21 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

oops, sorry. just realized that you added the coordinates Rbrausse (talk) 11:35, 21 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion of images

The level of creativity for something to become protected by copyright is very very low(in the UK it actualy is zero under some conditions). The signs clearly qualify. You will note that COM:FOP#United_Kingdom only applies to 3D objects which the signs were not.Geni (talk) 19:55, 9 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]


birds with one taking off

Hi Nevit. I finally made the "Wrong side of the door" video using the original French version of the song.
Again I used your birds for the central section - possibly with more effect this time :-)
Je Veux
Kind regards
David
Dwsolo (talk) 19:20, 30 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for using the photo and informing me... --Nevit Dilmen (talk) 13:25, 31 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:Mr Pipo 02 Mind.svg

dansk ∙ italiano ∙ sicilianu ∙ Deutsch ∙ català ∙ magyar ∙ čeština ∙ português do Brasil ∙ Esperanto ∙ español ∙ português ∙ English ∙ hrvatski ∙ français ∙ Nederlands ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ polski ∙ galego ∙ íslenska ∙ slovenščina ∙ suomi ∙ svenska ∙ Türkçe ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ ∙ български ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ українська ∙ മലയാളം ∙ 日本語 ∙ 中文（简体）‎ ∙ 中文（繁體）‎ ∙ فارسی ∙ +/−

There seems to be a problem regarding the description and/or licensing of this particular file. It has been found that you've added in the image's description only a Template that's not a license and although it provides useful information about the image, it's not a valid license. Could you please resolve this problem, adding the license in the image linked above? You can edit the description page and change the text. Uploading a new version of the file does not change the description of the file. This page may give you more hints on which license to choose. Thank you.

This message was added automatically by Nikbot, if you need some help about it, ask its master (Filnik) or go to the Commons:Help desk. --Filnik 21:38, 15 June 2010 (UTC)


File:Mr Pipo Brain 03.svg

dansk ∙ italiano ∙ sicilianu ∙ Deutsch ∙ català ∙ magyar ∙ čeština ∙ português do Brasil ∙ Esperanto ∙ español ∙ português ∙ English ∙ hrvatski ∙ français ∙ Nederlands ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ polski ∙ galego ∙ íslenska ∙ slovenščina ∙ suomi ∙ svenska ∙ Türkçe ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ ∙ български ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ українська ∙ മലയാളം ∙ 日本語 ∙ 中文（简体）‎ ∙ 中文（繁體）‎ ∙ فارسی ∙ +/−

There seems to be a problem regarding the description and/or licensing of this particular file. It has been found that you've added in the image's description only a Template that's not a license and although it provides useful information about the image, it's not a valid license. Could you please resolve this problem, adding the license in the image linked above? You can edit the description page and change the text. Uploading a new version of the file does not change the description of the file. This page may give you more hints on which license to choose. Thank you.

This message was added automatically by Nikbot, if you need some help about it, ask its master (Filnik) or go to the Commons:Help desk. --Filnik 21:39, 15 June 2010 (UTC)


File:Teach kids these skills.svg

dansk ∙ italiano ∙ sicilianu ∙ Deutsch ∙ català ∙ magyar ∙ čeština ∙ português do Brasil ∙ Esperanto ∙ español ∙ português ∙ English ∙ hrvatski ∙ français ∙ Nederlands ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ polski ∙ galego ∙ íslenska ∙ slovenščina ∙ suomi ∙ svenska ∙ Türkçe ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ ∙ български ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ українська ∙ മലയാളം ∙ 日本語 ∙ 中文（简体）‎ ∙ 中文（繁體）‎ ∙ فارسی ∙ +/−

There seems to be a problem regarding the description and/or licensing of this particular file. It has been found that you've added in the image's description only a Template that's not a license and although it provides useful information about the image, it's not a valid license. Could you please resolve this problem, adding the license in the image linked above? You can edit the description page and change the text. Uploading a new version of the file does not change the description of the file. This page may give you more hints on which license to choose. Thank you.

This message was added automatically by Nikbot, if you need some help about it, ask its master (Filnik) or go to the Commons:Help desk. --Filnik 22:56, 22 June 2010 (UTC)

File:Systemic_Sclerosis_Pulmonary_123J59_Nevit.gif

Hey Nevit, you have uploaded a bunch of files like File:Systemic_Sclerosis_Pulmonary_123J59_Nevit.gif. The description is insufficient and with out a legend the graphs are unusable (and they are unused). Not realistically useful for educational purposes means they are not in COM:SCOPE and thus fair game for speedy delete. Please comment. --Dschwen (talk) 15:20, 20 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:Jump 9568 0996 Leyla.gif

dansk ∙ italiano ∙ sicilianu ∙ Deutsch ∙ català ∙ magyar ∙ čeština ∙ português do Brasil ∙ Esperanto ∙ español ∙ português ∙ English ∙ hrvatski ∙ français ∙ Nederlands ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ polski ∙ galego ∙ íslenska ∙ slovenščina ∙ suomi ∙ svenska ∙ Türkçe ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ ∙ български ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ українська ∙ മലയാളം ∙ 日本語 ∙ 中文（简体）‎ ∙ 中文（繁體）‎ ∙ فارسی ∙ +/−

There seems to be a problem regarding the description and/or licensing of this particular file. It has been found that you've added in the image's description only a Template that's not a license and although it provides useful information about the image, it's not a valid license. Could you please resolve this problem, adding the license in the image linked above? You can edit the description page and change the text. Uploading a new version of the file does not change the description of the file. This page may give you more hints on which license to choose. Thank you.

This message was added automatically by Nikbot, if you need some help about it, ask its master (Filnik) or go to the Commons:Help desk. --Filnik 11:40, 26 July 2010 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Radiometer 9965 Nevit.gif, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates.

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Excellent animation. --King of Hearts 20:34, 2 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

FP Promotion

 ★ This image has been promoted to Featured picture! ★

The image File:Radiometer 9965 Nevit.gif, that you nominated on Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Radiometer 9965 Nevit.gif has been promoted. Thank you for your contribution. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so.

/FPCBot (talk) 13:00, 7 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Greetings

Hi Nevit, I've just seen we almost crossed each other in Serengeti. Is your journey over or do you stay for a while? Thanks for sharing so many excellent pictures with us! Regards --Ikiwaner (talk) 20:25, 20 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:Grey_Crowned_Crane_Balearica_regulorum_Tanzania_4021_cropped_Nevit.jpg

File:Grey_Crowned_Crane_Balearica_regulorum_Tanzania_4021_cropped_Nevit.jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues.

Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!
Afrikaans ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ bosanski ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ ∙ eesti ∙ English ∙ español ∙ Esperanto ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ hrvatski ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ magyar ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ occitan ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ polski ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ shqip ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ suomi ∙ svenska ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ Türkçe ∙ Zazaki ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ ∙ български ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ српски / srpski ∙ українська ∙ հայերեն ∙ বাংলা ∙ മലയാളം ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ ไทย ∙ 조선말 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 日本語 ∙ 简体中文‎ ∙ 繁體中文‎ ∙ עברית ∙ العربية ∙ پښتو ∙ فارسی ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ +/−

4028mdk09 (talk) 17:13, 22 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Memorial to John Cobb by Mike Peel

Hello! I tried to correct the perspective of this QI candidate you declined. I know that my job is not perfect, but I should be happy if you would give your opinion please. Thank you !--Jebulon (talk) 17:40, 22 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Quality Image Promotion
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Superb Starling Lamprotornis superbus 3541 Nevit.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates.

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments QI to me. --Cayambe 15:14, 20 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:Isfahan 1210945 nevit.jpg

Hi Nevit, I came across this image of you and I just admire the composition and also the pattern of the lamp. I love those arab patterns and arabesques. I have the impression others feel the same so it's FP-worthy. Unfortunately there is not enough image description to make it encyclopedically valuable. I'm specifically asking on information about the place it was taken and maybe the pattern itself. Could you fix that? --Ikiwaner (talk) 16:49, 23 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:Wattled Starling Creatophora cinerea on Zebra in Tanzania 0912 cropped Nevit.jpg

dansk ∙ italiano ∙ sicilianu ∙ Deutsch ∙ català ∙ magyar ∙ čeština ∙ português do Brasil ∙ Esperanto ∙ español ∙ português ∙ English ∙ hrvatski ∙ français ∙ Nederlands ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ polski ∙ galego ∙ íslenska ∙ slovenščina ∙ suomi ∙ svenska ∙ Türkçe ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ ∙ български ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ українська ∙ മലയാളം ∙ 日本語 ∙ 中文（简体）‎ ∙ 中文（繁體）‎ ∙ فارسی ∙ +/−

There seems to be a problem regarding the description and/or licensing of this particular file. It has been found that you've added in the image's description only a Template that's not a license and although it provides useful information about the image, it's not a valid license. Could you please resolve this problem, adding the license in the image linked above? You can edit the description page and change the text. Uploading a new version of the file does not change the description of the file. This page may give you more hints on which license to choose. Thank you.

This message was added automatically by Nikbot, if you need some help about it, ask its master (Filnik) or go to the Commons:Help desk. --Filnik 09:20, 24 August 2010 (UTC)


File:Wattled Starling Creatophora cinerea on Zebra in Tanzania 0912 Nevit.jpg

dansk ∙ italiano ∙ sicilianu ∙ Deutsch ∙ català ∙ magyar ∙ čeština ∙ português do Brasil ∙ Esperanto ∙ español ∙ português ∙ English ∙ hrvatski ∙ français ∙ Nederlands ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ polski ∙ galego ∙ íslenska ∙ slovenščina ∙ suomi ∙ svenska ∙ Türkçe ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ ∙ български ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ українська ∙ മലയാളം ∙ 日本語 ∙ 中文（简体）‎ ∙ 中文（繁體）‎ ∙ فارسی ∙ +/−

There seems to be a problem regarding the description and/or licensing of this particular file. It has been found that you've added in the image's description only a Template that's not a license and although it provides useful information about the image, it's not a valid license. Could you please resolve this problem, adding the license in the image linked above? You can edit the description page and change the text. Uploading a new version of the file does not change the description of the file. This page may give you more hints on which license to choose. Thank you.

This message was added automatically by Nikbot, if you need some help about it, ask its master (Filnik) or go to the Commons:Help desk. --Filnik 09:20, 24 August 2010 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Superb Starling Lamprotornis superbus 2966 cropped Nevit.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates.

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Good. --Cayambe 13:53, 22 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

QI reviews

Hello,

It seems that your reviews of quality images candidates are not based on quality criterias alone. Please do not take any review personally, and use only quality criterias for reviewing images. Thanks, Yann (talk) 13:02, 26 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Can you be specific. Preferably comment under the specific photo. --Nevit Dilmen (talk) 13:08, 26 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Ie. both you and other user has supported Commons:Quality_images_candidates/candidate_list#File:Legion_honneur_diamants.jpg. A file that is unsharp. Focus has been done on BG cloth. So it is flawed. --Nevit Dilmen (talk) 13:27, 26 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The problem is that you seem to have targeted all pictures of Jebulon, among others. Yann (talk) 13:55, 26 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
You are blaming generally again. Nor Jebulon or you should take picture evaluations personally. I evaluate photos not persons. --Nevit Dilmen (talk) 16:11, 26 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, You are again making unfair reviews. So see here. Regards, Yann (talk) 02:28, 30 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Please note that it is completely valid for someone to put an image into "discussion" after it has been declined by someone. It is not something that needs noting at all. Thanks --Herby talk thyme 08:13, 30 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I have often changed the status to "discussion" without signing. It is perfectly normal - it also saves issues that some folk have with the template and the clarity of the discussion. --Herby talk thyme 08:37, 30 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
This is Commons not Wikipedia - I do not agree with your statement that a change from "Promotion" or "Decline" to "Discuss" needs to be signed.
Please do not tell me what my obligations as a volunteer admin are - such an approach is at best unhelpful. I assist in the ways I can, when I can. I comply with policies - that is not one as far as I am aware --Herby talk thyme 11:59, 30 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Glossina

Hello, I've got a first answer about your pictures of tsetse by user:Archaeodontosaurus. Roughly translated from French: the genus Glossina is certain. However the images quality doesn't allow to tell if it is a specimen of Glossina morsitans. There are 4 species of Glossina in Tanzania: morsitans, swynnertoni, pallidipes, austeni. Keys for the identification include in particular the third antennal segment, see [5] => a clear close-up of the head would be necessary to assure that it is morsitans actually. --Myrabella (talk) 11:49, 30 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

  • Hello Nevit,
  1. I had asked more expert contributors' opinion before your withdrawn; it's simple courtesy to let you know their answer, if they to went to the trouble of examining my request.
  2. To me the VI project is a mean to improve the Commons repository. In this respect, the discussion isn't closed: your images are classed in Category:Glossina morsitans that you created some days ago. If the ID is questionable, it is worth discussion, and maybe a reclassification in a upper level of the categories tree after that.
  3. Pleased to meet a pioneer; however, projects are built by contributing, if you allow me this, in fact, encouragement. --Myrabella (talk) 03:16, 31 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Mme Tussaud?

Following up on your comment at Commons:Deletion requests/File:Thomas Gottschalk Wachsfigur.jpg, note that the FOP rules in the UK seem to permit our hosting of your photos at Mme Tussaud's.

"sculptures, models for buildings and works of artistic craftsmanship (if permanently situated in a public place or in premises open to the public)."

and

"The expression "open to the public" presumably extends the section to premises to which the public are admitted only on licence or on payment". Again, this is broader than 'public place' which is the wording in many countries."

I note also that Category:Madame Tussauds London has two images of sculptures, one of which has been kept after a DR. Your 100 will be very welcome.      Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 22:59, 5 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Licensing:

w:en:Creative Commons
attribution share alike
This file is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 Unported license.
You are free:
  • to share – to copy, distribute and transmit the work
  • to remix – to adapt the work
Under the following conditions:
  • attribution – You must give appropriate credit, provide a link to the license, and indicate if changes were made. You may do so in any reasonable manner, but not in any way that suggests the licensor endorses you or your use.
  • share alike – If you remix, transform, or build upon the material, you must distribute your contributions under the same or compatible license as the original.
                             <-- linespace here

<-- taxon category first! Category:Birds of Xxxx Category:Taken with Fujifilm FinePix HS10

If you are able to change the format to match, it makes post-upload editing simpler and quicker ;-) Thanks! MPF (talk) 10:13, 8 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Addenum: This one File:Rueppell's Glossy-starling in Tanzania 2952 Nevit.jpg is L. superbus; shall I rename it? - MPF (talk) 10:34, 8 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:Rueppell's Glossy-starling in Tanzania 2952 Nevit.jpg‎‎ -> File:Superb Starling Lamprotornis superbus in Tanzania 2952 Nevit.jpg

Done. Regards Electron  <Talk?> 11:10, 9 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

BTW. You can create a category for photos made by you e.g. Category:Photographs by Nevit or so. It might be useful... Electron  <Talk?> 11:25, 9 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
OK. Now, I see ;) I didn't notes before... because they are hidden categories and my FF prints their with very small letters... Electron  <Talk?> 11:49, 9 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Help

Hi, sorry for bother, could you please rename this file so I can use it correctly ? I already added the ren template. thanks! --Jor70 (talk) 16:20, 23 September 2010 (UTC) Hi! cool animations! what program did you use? Kaspersky 2011[reply]

File:Lion Panthera leo in Tanzania 3169 Nevit.jpg

"Lion Panthera leo" - are you sure? Cordially, --4028mdk09 (talk) 03:55, 19 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

airhorse

Hi Nevit
I plan to make a little video for youtube based on the airhorse. I did a few airhorse images myself using L-Parser many years ago (in addition to a piece of music created on the same formula) but I would like to include your image as well.
You can email me at dwsolo@gmail.com if you like


Update: here is the video, hope you like it:
Airhorses and how they breed
Kind regards
David Dwsolo (talk) 15:02, 24 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:Door 08903.jpg

Hello. Regarding File:Door 08903.jpg -- Do you know where this is? (What city, or what country?) If so, could you please add information? Thank you. Cheers, Infrogmation (talk) 17:38, 1 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Thyroid_gland

Category discussion notification Category:Thyroid_gland has been listed at Commons:Categories for discussion so that the community can discuss ways in which it should be changed. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

If you created this category, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for discussion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it. If the category is up for deletion because it has been superseded, consider the notion that although the category may be deleted, your hard work (which we all greatly appreciate) lives on in the new category.
In all cases, please do not take the category discussion personally. It is never intended as such. Thank you!

čeština ∙ Deutsch ∙ English ∙ español ∙ français ∙ italiano ∙ magyar ∙ Nederlands ∙ português ∙ polski ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenščina ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ українська ∙ ತುಳು ∙ ಕನ್ನಡ ∙ ไทย ∙ עברית ∙ 日本語 ∙ 中文 ∙ +/−

75.181.86.97 15:18, 12 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

File:Insect 1380106 nevit.jpg

dansk ∙ italiano ∙ sicilianu ∙ Deutsch ∙ català ∙ magyar ∙ čeština ∙ português do Brasil ∙ Esperanto ∙ español ∙ português ∙ English ∙ hrvatski ∙ français ∙ Nederlands ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ polski ∙ galego ∙ íslenska ∙ slovenščina ∙ suomi ∙ svenska ∙ Türkçe ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ ∙ български ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ українська ∙ മലയാളം ∙ 日本語 ∙ 中文（简体）‎ ∙ 中文（繁體）‎ ∙ فارسی ∙ +/−

There seems to be a problem regarding the description and/or licensing of this particular file. It has been found that you've added in the image's description only a Template that's not a license and although it provides useful information about the image, it's not a valid license. Could you please resolve this problem, adding the license in the image linked above? You can edit the description page and change the text. Uploading a new version of the file does not change the description of the file. This page may give you more hints on which license to choose. Thank you.

This message was added automatically by Nikbot, if you need some help about it please read the text above again and follow the links in it, if you still need help ask at the ? → Commons:Help desk in any language you like to use. --Nikbot 20:54, 15 June 2011 (UTC)


File:Midyat 1380112 nevit.jpg

dansk ∙ italiano ∙ sicilianu ∙ Deutsch ∙ català ∙ magyar ∙ čeština ∙ português do Brasil ∙ Esperanto ∙ español ∙ português ∙ English ∙ hrvatski ∙ français ∙ Nederlands ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ polski ∙ galego ∙ íslenska ∙ slovenščina ∙ suomi ∙ svenska ∙ Türkçe ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ ∙ български ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ українська ∙ മലയാളം ∙ 日本語 ∙ 中文（简体）‎ ∙ 中文（繁體）‎ ∙ فارسی ∙ +/−

There seems to be a problem regarding the description and/or licensing of this particular file. It has been found that you've added in the image's description only a Template that's not a license and although it provides useful information about the image, it's not a valid license. Could you please resolve this problem, adding the license in the image linked above? You can edit the description page and change the text. Uploading a new version of the file does not change the description of the file. This page may give you more hints on which license to choose. Thank you.

This message was added automatically by Nikbot, if you need some help about it please read the text above again and follow the links in it, if you still need help ask at the ? → Commons:Help desk in any language you like to use. --Nikbot 21:19, 15 June 2011 (UTC)


File:Insect 1380100 nevit.jpg

dansk ∙ italiano ∙ sicilianu ∙ Deutsch ∙ català ∙ magyar ∙ čeština ∙ português do Brasil ∙ Esperanto ∙ español ∙ português ∙ English ∙ hrvatski ∙ français ∙ Nederlands ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ polski ∙ galego ∙ íslenska ∙ slovenščina ∙ suomi ∙ svenska ∙ Türkçe ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ ∙ български ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ українська ∙ മലയാളം ∙ 日本語 ∙ 中文（简体）‎ ∙ 中文（繁體）‎ ∙ فارسی ∙ +/−

There seems to be a problem regarding the description and/or licensing of this particular file. It has been found that you've added in the image's description only a Template that's not a license and although it provides useful information about the image, it's not a valid license. Could you please resolve this problem, adding the license in the image linked above? You can edit the description page and change the text. Uploading a new version of the file does not change the description of the file. This page may give you more hints on which license to choose. Thank you.

This message was added automatically by Nikbot, if you need some help about it please read the text above again and follow the links in it, if you still need help ask at the ? → Commons:Help desk in any language you like to use. --Nikbot 21:22, 15 June 2011 (UTC)


File:Science Museum London 1110521 nevit.jpg

Okey what is this photo actualy of? I'm trying to sort out Category:Science Museum (London) and your photos are some of the harder to identify. I think a lot of them come from the Launchpad gallery but I can't identify all of them.Geni (talk) 15:34, 16 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

File:Stick.svg

dansk ∙ italiano ∙ sicilianu ∙ Deutsch ∙ català ∙ magyar ∙ čeština ∙ português do Brasil ∙ Esperanto ∙ español ∙ português ∙ English ∙ hrvatski ∙ français ∙ Nederlands ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ polski ∙ galego ∙ íslenska ∙ slovenščina ∙ suomi ∙ svenska ∙ Türkçe ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ ∙ български ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ українська ∙ മലയാളം ∙ 日本語 ∙ 中文（简体）‎ ∙ 中文（繁體）‎ ∙ فارسی ∙ +/−

There seems to be a problem regarding the description and/or licensing of this particular file. It has been found that you've added in the image's description only a Template that's not a license and although it provides useful information about the image, it's not a valid license. Could you please resolve this problem, adding the license in the image linked above? You can edit the description page and change the text. Uploading a new version of the file does not change the description of the file. This page may give you more hints on which license to choose. Thank you.

This message was added automatically by Nikbot, if you need some help about it please read the text above again and follow the links in it, if you still need help ask at the ? → Commons:Help desk in any language you like to use. --Nikbot 15:22, 10 July 2011 (UTC)


File:Ultrasound lesions echogenicity.svg

dansk ∙ italiano ∙ sicilianu ∙ Deutsch ∙ català ∙ magyar ∙ čeština ∙ português do Brasil ∙ Esperanto ∙ español ∙ português ∙ English ∙ hrvatski ∙ français ∙ Nederlands ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ polski ∙ galego ∙ íslenska ∙ slovenščina ∙ suomi ∙ svenska ∙ Türkçe ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ ∙ български ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ українська ∙ മലയാളം ∙ 日本語 ∙ 中文（简体）‎ ∙ 中文（繁體）‎ ∙ فارسی ∙ +/−

There seems to be a problem regarding the description and/or licensing of this particular file. It has been found that you've added in the image's description only a Template that's not a license and although it provides useful information about the image, it's not a valid license. Could you please resolve this problem, adding the license in the image linked above? You can edit the description page and change the text. Uploading a new version of the file does not change the description of the file. This page may give you more hints on which license to choose. Thank you.

This message was added automatically by Nikbot, if you need some help about it please read the text above again and follow the links in it, if you still need help ask at the ? → Commons:Help desk in any language you like to use. --Nikbot 13:37, 12 July 2011 (UTC)

File:Skeleton Carrier relax.jpg

Pay attention to licensing
Wikimedia Commons only accepts free content: images and other media files that can be used by anyone, for any purpose.

File:Skeleton Carrier relax.jpg seems to be free (or it would be proposed for deletion), but it was identified as having a wrong license. Usually, it is because a public domain image is tagged with a free license, or because the stated source or other information is not sufficient to prove the selected tag is correct. Please verify that you applied the correct license tag for this file.

If you believe this file has the correct license, please explain why on the file discussion page.

العربية ∙ Deutsch ∙ English ∙ español ∙ français ∙ 日本語 ∙ മലയാളം ∙ polski ∙ português ∙ slovenščina ∙ svenska ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ 简体中文 ∙ 繁體中文 ∙ +/−


The reason given by the user who added this tag is: so much different licenses for sources of this derivative. GFDL migrated into CC BY SA 3.0, CC BY, non migrated GFDL.. at least, i think it can not be GFDL as stated. I dont think non migrated GFDL and CC BY, and CC BY SA are compatible ?

--Lilyu (talk) 09:29, 31 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

File:Colored pencils.svg

dansk ∙ italiano ∙ sicilianu ∙ Deutsch ∙ català ∙ magyar ∙ čeština ∙ português do Brasil ∙ Esperanto ∙ español ∙ português ∙ English ∙ hrvatski ∙ français ∙ Nederlands ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ polski ∙ galego ∙ íslenska ∙ slovenščina ∙ suomi ∙ svenska ∙ Türkçe ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ ∙ български ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ українська ∙ മലയാളം ∙ 日本語 ∙ 中文（简体）‎ ∙ 中文（繁體）‎ ∙ فارسی ∙ +/−

There seems to be a problem regarding the description and/or licensing of this particular file. It has been found that you've added in the image's description only a Template that's not a license and although it provides useful information about the image, it's not a valid license. Could you please resolve this problem, adding the license in the image linked above? You can edit the description page and change the text. Uploading a new version of the file does not change the description of the file. This page may give you more hints on which license to choose. Thank you.

This message was added automatically by Nikbot, if you need some help about it please read the text above again and follow the links in it, if you still need help ask at the ? → Commons:Help desk in any language you like to use. --Nikbot 21:56, 12 August 2011 (UTC)

Category:SVG cliparts=

Unfortunately, "cliparts" isn't really a word of English (in most usage, it's two words "clip art", or at most hyphenated, and a mass noun rather than a countable noun)... AnonMoos (talk) 09:44, 21 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

File:Color square cm.svg

dansk ∙ italiano ∙ sicilianu ∙ Deutsch ∙ català ∙ magyar ∙ čeština ∙ português do Brasil ∙ Esperanto ∙ español ∙ português ∙ English ∙ hrvatski ∙ français ∙ Nederlands ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ polski ∙ galego ∙ íslenska ∙ slovenščina ∙ suomi ∙ svenska ∙ Türkçe ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ ∙ български ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ українська ∙ മലയാളം ∙ 日本語 ∙ 中文（简体）‎ ∙ 中文（繁體）‎ ∙ فارسی ∙ +/−

There seems to be a problem regarding the description and/or licensing of this particular file. It has been found that you've added in the image's description only a Template that's not a license and although it provides useful information about the image, it's not a valid license. Could you please resolve this problem, adding the license in the image linked above? You can edit the description page and change the text. Uploading a new version of the file does not change the description of the file. This page may give you more hints on which license to choose. Thank you.

This message was added automatically by Nikbot, if you need some help about it please read the text above again and follow the links in it, if you still need help ask at the ? → Commons:Help desk in any language you like to use. --Nikbot 23:56, 26 August 2011 (UTC)

I have been political and I don't like that about me

Hi, first of all let me just say that the confusion/conflict between the words that describe the contents of a file and the words that describe the format of the file are annoying to me. It was no easy task to install the movie player on my computer and there is some extremely suspicious sometimes it works and sometimes it doesn't work behavior which I am ultimately so very bored with. It should not be the way a life worth living ends up being lived, etc.

Anyways, it is annoying to me to have long discussions about the words for media which needs different viewing software. Then a few weeks after that, I looked into the start of the categorization and it seems that this problem began when they first called gif with layers and time instructions "animations". When I was growing up, we used to watch the "cartoons" on Saturday morning, which was the only time they showed them back then. So, here, they are using this word "cartoon" for only single image eh, instances. That is just not going to work and there does not need to be any discussion of it.

You have uploaded some interesting gif and video here. Here comes the apology. I was very annoyed by this discussion with a person who I will assume is not you before you dropped in at my talk page to discuss this. I am quite certain that this annoyance has affected the fact that I have not used any of your more interesting videos (I actually liked the balloons that did not explode more than the ones that did) as MOTD.

That was wrong of me. I don't like that when it happens to me and I really don't like it when I do this to others. Mostly, I try to avoid it but I must be honest and admit that I was not successful with this. Please, accept my apology and extend your patience while I try to adjust for this error of mine.

I did try to "make friends" with this annoyance and days and days later, there was no response -- although, I have not checked in a while. It is difficult to know if that plan of attack of my problem would have been successful and I might have had no reason to be apologizing now.

I have a question for you. Is this you: http://gimpedimenta.org/resources/gradients/Nevits_292-gallery.shtml and is that your web site? -- Queeg (talk) 10:18, 29 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Nevit/Archive_1&oldid=98650397"